Marco Rubio (R)

Positions & Statements on the Issues

[Editor's Note: On Tuesday Mar. 15, 2016, Senator Marco Rubio announced the suspension of his presidential campaign in a speech at his Miami campaign headquarters. He stated: "The politics of resentment against other people will not just leave us a fractured party. They're gonna leave us a fractured nation. They're gonna leave us as a nation where people literally hate each other, because they have different political opinions… While it is not God's plan that I be president in 2016 or maybe ever, and while today my campaign is suspended, the fact that I've even come this far is evidence of how special America truly is, and all the reason more why we must do all we can to ensure that this nation remains a special place."]

"I do not believe the president should appoint someone. And it's not unprecedented. In fact, it has been over 80 years since a lame duck president has appointed a Supreme Court justice.
And it reminds us of this, how important this election is. Someone on this stage will get to choose the balance of the Supreme Court, and it will begin by filling this vacancy that's there now.
And we need to put people on the bench that understand that the Constitution is not a living and breathing document. It is to be interpreted as originally meant."

"[W]e would cut the current 35% corporate tax rate to make it competitive in the global economy. The exact rate will be determined as we continue to shape the legislation, but it must be low enough to end the problem of corporate inversions and the loss of American jobs to other nations. We will also allow companies large and small to deduct their expenses and capital investments while integrating all forms of business taxation into a consolidated, single-layer tax...

In sum, our proposal would make it easier for Americans to find jobs and easier for businesses to create them."

"The current tax code taxes too much, taxes unfairly, and conspires with our outmoded welfare system to trap poor families in poverty, rather than facilitate their climb into the middle class. Our reforms seek to simplify the structure and lower rates. How? By consolidating the many existing income tax brackets into two simple brackets—15% and 35%—and eliminating or reforming deductions, especially those that disproportionately benefit the privileged few at everyone else’s expense."

"I have gathered input from Americans of all economic backgrounds and engaged in discussions with leaders across the conservative movement to form a complete, pro-growth, pro-family tax reform agenda for the 21st century.

My plan is a significant departure from the old school tax reform ideas that so often come out of Washington. First, on the individual side, my plan reduces the number of brackets from seven to three: 15%, 25%, and 35%. The plan eliminates all exemptions and deductions, except for a charitable contribution deduction and a reformed home mortgage interest deduction. Taxpayers will instead receive a personal tax credit that phases out for higher-income Americans. This greatly simplified code will cut taxes for the vast majority of people."

"HARWOOD: You want to raise the retirement age for Social Security? Do you agree with President [George W.] Bush on private accounts?

RUBIO: No, I think the time has passed for that. The traditional three stools of retirement—the defined benefit plan, Social Security and private savings—are all under stress. And I think that we do need to provide more flexibility on the personal side where people can find more vehicles for their own money. But Social Security itself, no, I don't think privatization is the right approach…

What I tell people my age and younger is, 'Our benefits (are) not going to grow as fast as our parents' grew. Especially if we've been financially successful.' These are not draconian changes for future generations. But here's the truth: Our Social Security and Medicare is going to be different than our parents' one way or the other."

ProIs the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Trade Agreement Good for America?

"Millions of the best jobs in this century will depend on international trade. It is more important than ever that Congress give the President Trade Promotion Authority so we can finalize the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. These agreements will create millions of jobs and cement U.S. strategic partnerships in Asia, South America, and Europe."

"Our political system is at its best when candidates, campaigns and voters focus on ideas, issues and principles. Unfortunately, our citizens' right to free speech and to participate in the political process has been undermined for years by McCain-Feingold and similar laws.

The best way to ensure our political system is less reliant on money is not to pass laws which infringe on fundamental rights, but rather to elect leaders who value policy and principles over politics and special interests. Today's Supreme Court ruling [in the Citizens United case] is a victory for those who truly value the freedoms outlined in our First Amendment.”

ProShould Voters Be Required to Show Photo Identification in Order to Vote?

"About a week ago I went and bought an exercise bike because my wife said I was looking too Senatorial, if you know what I mean, and then, you know what this cashier asked me for? When I want to pay? My ID. This morning I got on an airplane, you know what they asked me for?...

So what's the big deal [about having a voter ID rule]? What is the big deal?"

"I believe, that as long as it's being disclosed [campaign contributions], the people have a right to participate in our political process, and that includes firms that have an interest, and that includes individuals who have an interest."

"[T]he negative effects of China's economic meddling are severe. The Chinese government's efforts to devalue its currency and rig global trade are a rising threat to our economic interests.

China is also a growing danger to our national security. Earlier this year, it was behind the largest cyber-attack ever carried out against the United States. Its current ruler, Xi Jinping, is trying to convince his country's 1.3 billion people that the way to reestablish Chinese greatness is to undermine the United States and enhance China's influence at our expense…

Under Xi Jinping's rule, China has intensified its campaign to push America out of Asia, denouncing our long-standing alliances with other democracies like Japan and the Philippines, developing weapons that threaten our bases and naval assets, and declaring that Asian affairs should be left to 'the people of Asia.'"

"When Cuba joins the rest of the civilized world in how it treats its people... That's the kind of country that I'm interested in us having a relationship with. And the embargo serves as leverage for us to be able to accomplish that...

Cuba trades with every other country in the world. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. embargo is not the reason their economy is failing. Their economy is failing because they've embraced a combination of socialism and incompetence, which may be an oxymoron because they're both the same thing...

What's happening now is that the Castro government is using travel and exile travel as a way to fund its repressive regime... And it also provides a source of hard currency for the Castro regime. They use the dollars from remittances and from travel to fund their repressive operation. I think it was wrong to lift those travel restrictions."

"I do think it is important, for the world, and especially for Iran to understand that as far as the American sanctions are concerned, this is a deal whose survival is not guaranteed beyond the term of the current President.

And, by the way, I personally hope the next President is someone who will remove the national security waiver and reimpose the congressional sanctions that were passed by Congress, because this deal is fundamentally and irreparably flawed. I believe it weakens our national security, and it makes the world a more dangerous place...

No matter what happens, Iran will keep the more than billions of dollars it is going to receive up front, basically as a signing bonus. Iran will be allowed to continue to develop long-range ballistic missiles, ICBMs, that know only one purpose, and that is for nuclear warfare...

On terrorism, this deal will provide billions, possibly hundreds of billions, to a regime that, according to Director of National Intelligence Clapper 'directly threatens the interests of the United States and our allies.'

And lastly, nothing in the deal holds Iran to account on human rights. Quite the opposite, the Iranian regime, is being rewarded for its atrocious human rights record...

I hope enough of my Democratic colleagues can be persuaded to vote against this deal and prevent the president from executing it."

Not Clearly Pro or ConShould There Be an Independent Palestinian State?

"The [Israeli] Prime Minister [Netanyahu] made a statement about how a two-state solution isn't possible, given the current circumstances. And what does the White House do? They jump up and say, well, that means we have to reconsider. We may have to go to the United Nations Security Council now and support a resolution. That means not use our veto authority to stop a resolution that calls on Israel to create a Palestinian state with 1967 borders...

In 2000 at camp David, Israel offered the Palestinian Authority nearly all of the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem and Gaza, and the Palestinians said no...

In 2008, Israel offered again the Palestinian Authority, nearly all of the West Bank, nearly all of Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem. The Palestinian Authority said no...

I think Netanyahu is right. The conditions do not exist for a peace deal with people who teach their children that killing Jews is a glorious thing. The conditions for peace do not exist with a people, with a government, I should say, not a people. The people are victims of this government, of the Palestinian Authority, and not to mention Hamas, who teach people that killing Jews is a glorious thing, that there is no such thing as a Jewish people, that any methods of destroying them is valid, that pay them salaries and benefits."

"As Congress prepares to consider new gun control legislation, I stand firmly against any attempt to restrict the constitutional rights of responsible, law-abiding gun owners. As a concealed weapons permit holder, I value the freedom to exercise my Second Amendment right as protected by the Constitution and in accordance with gun laws designed to promote safe, responsible use. The right to bear arms is a unique and fundamental aspect of American liberty because, when exercised responsibly and in accordance with the laws in place, it makes our families and our property safer.

Last week, I announced I would join efforts to filibuster any gun control proposals that seek to restrict the rights of Americans who have never violated the law...

Current gun control proposals being discussed by Washington Democrats – by the admission of their own authors – would not have stopped the tragedies in Newtown or Aurora... any effective plan to deal with future violence must focus on addressing mental illness and identifying those Americans who should be forbidden to own guns."

Source: Marco Rubio, "Why I Support the Second Amendment - and Democrats Should Too," townhall.com, Apr. 4, 2013

ProShould People on the No-Fly List or the Terror Watch List Be Allowed to Purchase Guns?

"[T]he majority of people on the no-fly list are oftentimes people that basically just have the same name as somebody else who don't belong on the no-fly list…

Ted Kennedy once said he was on a no- fly list... there are journalists on the no-fly list…

These are everyday Americans that have nothing to with terrorism. They wind up on the no-fly list. There's no due process or any way to get your name removed from it in a timely fashion. And now they're having their Second Amendment right being impeded upon.

If these were perfect lists, that would be one thing. But there are over 700,000 Americans on some watch list or another that would all be captured under this amendment the Democrats offered. And that's the problem…

They include vast numbers of Americans who have names similar to someone we're looking for. Sometimes, you're only on that list because the FBI wants to talk to you about someone you know, not because you're a suspect. And, again, now your Second Amendment right is being impeded."

[Editor's Note: On Dec. 3, 2015, Senator Rubio voted no on S.Amdt. 2910 "to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected dangerous terrorists."]

RUBIO: I have never said that. And I have never advocated that. What I have advocated is that we pass law in this country that says all human life at every stage of its development is worthy of protection. In fact, I think that law already exists. It is called the Constitution of the United States...

And let me go further. I believe that every single human being is entitled to the protection of our laws, whether they can vote or not. Whether they can speak or not. Whether they can hire a lawyer or not. Whether they have a birth certificate or not. And I think future generations will look back at this history of our country and call us barbarians for murdering millions of babies who we never gave them a chance to live."

[Editor's Note: In addition to the above Con statement, Marco Rubio also made the following CON statement on his campaign website page "Protecting Life at Every Stage," available at marcorubio.com: "I believe that Roe v. Wade was not only morally wrong, but it was a poorly decided legal precedent and should be overturned."]

"I disagree with the Court's ruling [upholding the Obamacare subsidies] and believe they have once again erred in trying to correct the mistakes made by President Obama and Congress in forcing Obamacare on the American people.

Despite the Court's decision, ObamaCare is still a bad law that is having a negative impact on our country and on millions of Americans. I remain committed to repealing this bad law and replacing it with my consumer-centered plan that puts patients and families back in control of their health care decisions. We need Consumer Care, not ObamaCare."

ProShould Parental Consent Be Required for Pregnant Minors to Have Abortions?

"With the rights of parents and the safety of our nation's daughters at risk, Congress must take action to prevent underage abortions by giving states the federal backing necessary to enforce their parental involvement laws. These laws allow teenagers to receive the advice and guidance of a loved one before undergoing a procedure for which they may not be medically or emotionally prepared. Under current law, minors are subject to the exploitation and safety risks that often come from an overzealous interstate abortion industry."

Not Clearly Pro or ConShould Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal?

Source:

[Editor's Note: On Oct. 20, 2003, Marco Rubio, then a member of the Florida House of Representatives, voted in favor of "Terri's Law" (HB 35E) giving Governor Jeb Bush the authority “to issue a one-time stay to prevent the withholding of nutrition and hydration from” Terri Schiavo.]

"The cruel and callous language used by senior Planned Parenthood officials is sickening, shows a complete disregard for innocent unborn life, not to mention Planned Parenthood's clients, and speaks to an organization that is morally bankrupt. There is simply no justification for an organization that fosters this kind of culture to receive a penny of taxpayer funding..."

Not Clearly Pro or ConShould All Americans Have the Right (Be Entitled) to Health Care?

"I have worked to assemble a three part plan to serve as a foundation for the post-Obamacare era...

First, we should provide an advanceable, refundable tax credit that all Americans can use to purchase health insurance...

Second, we must reform insurance regulations to encourage innovation. Americans with pre-existing conditions should be able to find coverage through their state’s federally-supported, actuarially-sound high risk pools. Americans living in high-cost states should have the opportunity to purchase coverage across state lines. Consumer-centered products like health savings accounts should be expanded…

I believe we must move Medicaid into a per-capita cap system, preserving funding for Medicaid’s unique populations while freeing states from Washington mandates. Medicare, meanwhile, should be transitioned into a premium support system, empowering seniors with choice and market competition, just like Medicare Advantage and Part D already do.

It is my hope that all Americans will have access to affordable health insurance in the 21st century. These consumer-centered reforms will advance that goal the only way it can be advanced: by channeling the power of our free market."

ProShould the United States Continue to Build the Fence/Wall along the US-Mexico Border?

"Here's the way forward: First, we must - we must secure our border, the physical border, with a wall, absolutely. But we also need to have an entry/exit tracking system. 40 percent of the people who come here illegally come legally, and then they overstay the visa. We also need a mandatory e-verify system."

ProShould Undocumented Immigrants in the United States Be Allowed to Become Legal Residents?

"If you are in the country for a decade or longer, have not otherwise violated our laws, you would have to come forward, undergo a criminal background check, obviously pass that. You would have to pay a fine for having broken our laws, you would have to start paying taxes, you would have to learn English, and in exchange for all of that, what you would get is the equivalent of a non-immigrant, non-permanent work visa to be in the U.S. And you would have to be in that status for a significant period of time, and at some point, if you choose, you could apply for permanent residency, but you’d have to do it through that modernized legal immigration system, and you’d have to do it just like everybody else. It’s not a special process or anything of that nature, and in the interim, you’d have that work status, if you choose."

[Editor's Note: Marco Rubio voted in favor of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, which included a path to legalization, and eventually citizenship, for immigrants who are currently in the United States illegally provided they met certain conditions.]

"One of the things we talked about in the past, and we tried to get included with negotiations with Democrats in the past, is the idea of getting rid of the sanctuary city situation. Saying to these localities, if you are not going to participate in helping us to enforce these laws, they you are not going to be eligible for the federal funding that you are receiving.

It's an outrageous situation where you have these localities [sanctuary cities] that basically decide that because they have got a political agenda, or a view of immigration law, they can somehow ignore the enforcement of these laws...

In this case you have political elected officials, and an ultra-liberal government, who refuses to comply with the law because they don't agree with the law, and that is just completely unacceptable."

[Editor's Note: On Oct. 20, 2015, Senator Marco Rubio voted in favor of the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act (S.2146). The bill would have prohibited "sanctuary jurisdictions" from receiving federal grants for law enforcement under the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, the Community Oriented Policing Services Program, and the Community Development Block Grant Program.]

"The problem is we can't background check them. You can't pick up the phone and call Syria. And that's one of the reasons why I said we won't be able to take more refugees. It's not that we don't want to, it's that we can't. Because there's no way to background check someone that’s coming from Syria. Who do you call and do a background check on them?...

In the case of what's happening in Europe, this is a swarm of refugees, and as I've said repeatedly over the last few months, you can have 1,000 people come in, and 999 of them are just poor people fleeing oppression and violence, but one of them is an ISIS fighter. If that's the case, you have a problem, and there is no way to vet that out. There is no background check system in the world that allows us to find that out, because who do you call in Syria to background check them?"

"I want people to make a lot more than $9. Nine dollars is not enough. The problem is that you can't do that by mandating it in the minimum wage laws. Minimum wage laws have never worked in terms of helping the middle class attain more prosperity...

"I've said that I'm open to medicinal uses of anything, and particularly marijuana. And if, in fact, it goes through the F.D.A. process and you can come up with a proven medicinal benefit to that substance, I'm open to that. I'm not in favor of legalizing marijuana. I'm not. I never have been."

Not Clearly Pro or ConShould the United States Send Ground Troops to Fight ISIS?

"I think the strategy [to defeat ISIS] has to involve more coordination with the Kurds and also with Sunnis, because you're not going to defeat ISIS, a radical Sunni movement, without a robust anti-ISIS Sunni coalition.

So, I do think [Obama sending 50 special operations troops into Syria] it's important tactical step forward. It needs to be backed up with increased airstrikes and so forth. So, I don't have a problem with the tactics of it. And the numbers might even have to be larger at some point. But I think the bigger issue is, can they arrive at a strategy?...

ISIS will not be defeated unless they are confronted by an organized anti-ISIS Sunni movement. And that won't happen without American assistance at some significant level, like what you're seeing proposed now."

"You wake up this morning to the news that the president is planning to close Guantanamo — maybe even giving it back to the Cuban government. This makes no sense to me. No. 1, we're not giving back an important naval base to an anti-American communist dictatorship.

No. 2, we're not going to close Guantanamo. In fact, we shouldn't be releasing the people that are there now. They are enemy combatants...

These are literally enemy combatants. In essence, soldiers — though not soldiers — terrorists of foreign terrorist organizations, many of whom as soon as you release them, they rejoin the fight against us."

"[I]t should trouble all of us that our leaders have allowed the size of America's military, the modernity of its equipment, and the extent of its readiness to decline sharply in recent years...

First came defense cuts of $487 billion over ten years. Then, adding insult to injury, the savings found in the defense budget were redirected to already bloated domestic programs...

This was followed by tens of billions more in defense cuts each year through sequestration, despite the warnings of three Secretaries of Defense and our entire military leadership.

All in all, inflation-adjusted defense spending has declined 21 percent since 2010. Even if we discount the drawdowns in Iraq and Afghanistan, it has still declined a dangerous 12 percent…

We must instead demonstrate a strength in defense capabilities that, as President Reagan envisioned, leaves our enemies unwilling to provoke us… This begins with a willingness to allocate an appropriate amount of money toward our defense needs.

I urge the president to make a request to Congress for additional funding for our military above the amount he requested in February."

ProShould the National Security Agency (NSA) Continue to Collect Phone and Email Metadata on US Citizens?

"There is nothing that we are allowed to do under this bill [USA Freedom Act] that we could not do before. This bill did, however, take away a valuable tool that allowed the National Security Agency and other law — and other intelligence agencies to quickly and rapidly access phone records and match them up with other phone records to see who terrorists have been calling. Because I promise you, the next time there is attack on — an attack on this country, the first thing people are going to want to know is, why didn’t we know about it and why didn’t we stop it? And the answer better not be because we didn’t have access to records or information that would have allowed us to identify these killers before they attacked."

Not Clearly Pro or ConShould Interrogation Techniques That Some Consider Torture, Such as Waterboarding, Be a Legal Option?

"I do not support telegraphing to the enemy what interrogation techniques we will or won't use, and denying future commanders in chief and intelligence officials important tools for protecting the American people and the U.S. homeland…

I would have voted 'no' on this amendment [S.Amdt.1889 to 'reaffirm the prohibition on torture.']."

Not Clearly Pro or ConIs the Black Lives Matter Movement Good for America?

"Irrespective of how some of you may feel about how people behave, they [Black Lives Matter] have a first amendment right to talk about this…

There is a legitimate issue here, and I have talked about it in the past…

It is a fact that in the African American community around this country, there has been for a number of years now a growing resentment towards the way law enforcement and the criminal justice system interacts with the community.

It is particularly endemic among young African American males, that in some communities in this country have a much higher chance of interacting with criminal justice than higher education…

We do need to face this, it is a serious problem in this country…

I don't know if this group [Black Lives Matter] has a detailed policy agenda, but it is a legitimate issue.”

"[H]umans are not responsible for climate change in the way some of these people out there are trying to make us believe, for the following reason.

I believe climate is changing because there's never been a moment where the climate is not changing. The question is, what percentage of that or what is due to human activity? If we do the things they want us to do, cap and trade, you name it, how much will that change the pace of climates change vs. how much will it cost to our economy?

Scientists can't tell us what impact it would have on reversing these changes. But I can tell you with certainty it would have a devastating impact on our economy."

"Over the past twenty years, advances in biotechnology have led to the increased use of genetic engineering to produce many of the food products consumed by Americans. Originally, genetic engineering was used to enhance the production yield and resiliency of field crops, like tomatoes and corn, but modern techniques have expanded the use of genetic engineering to a wide range of commercially available food products, like dairy, fish, and meat. Although genetically engineered food products have been approved and regulated by various federal agencies, their safety, as well as the environmental and economic impact of their use, continues to be debated among agricultural, environmental, and consumer groups.

As you may know, on May 23, 2013 the Senate voted down, 27-71, an amendment to S. 954, the Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013, offered by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) which would have permitted states to require that any food offered for sale have a label indicating that the food contains a genetically engineered ingredient...

I believe common-sense, market-oriented solutions based on sound science are the best approach to protecting consumers."

ProShould the United States Authorize the Keystone XL Pipeline to Import Tar Sand Oil from Canada?

"President Obama's decision not to move forward on the Keystone pipeline is a mistake. This decision offers even more appalling evidence that this administration is hopelessly rudder-less in its jobs and energy policies. By not acting on Keystone, the President is depriving America of a means to create jobs, take a step towards energy independence, and bolster our national security by tapping into our energy resources and those of our friends in Canada instead of tyrannical governments."

ConWas the US Supreme Court Decision Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage a Good Decision?

"I believe that marriage, as the key to strong family life, is the most important institution in our society and should be between one man and one woman. People who disagree with the traditional definition of marriage have the right to change their state laws. That is the right of our people, not the right of the unelected judges or justices of the Supreme Court. This decision short-circuits the political process that has been underway on the state level for years.

While I disagree with this decision, we live in a republic and must abide by the law...

A large number of Americans will continue to believe in traditional marriage, and a large number of Americans will be pleased with the Court's decision today. In the years ahead, it is my hope that each side will respect the dignity of the other."

ProShould Religious Liberty Give People the Right to Deny Goods and Services for Gay Marriage?

"I think the fundamental question in some of these laws is should someone be discriminated against because of their religious views. So no one is saying here that it should be legal to deny someone service at a restaurant or a hotel because of their sexual orientation...

The flip side of it is: should a photographer be punished for refusing to do a wedding that their faith teaches them is not one that is valid in the eyes of God...

Should someone who provides a professional service be punished by the law because they refuse to provide that professional service to a ceremony that that they believe is in violation of their faith? I think people have a right to live out their religious faith in their own lives."